ClevelandFanForLife Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 I have been reading a little Lockout talk lately and one thing I keep on seeing is that a lot of fans are putting this on De Smith. I don't know much about the guy except that he was a lawyer and had no football background. Why do people think that he is the problem? Where does this stem from? Why does my wife hate when I refer to breasts as "shabadoos"? Can the players just override what Smith says and work a deal without him? These are all questions that I would like answered. Thanks in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickers Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 I have been reading a little Lockout talk lately and one thing I keep on seeing is that a lot of fans are putting this on De Smith. I don't know much about the guy except that he was a lawyer and had no football background. Why do people think that he is the problem? Where does this stem from? Why does my wife hate when I refer to breasts as "shabadoos"? Can the players just override what Smith says and work a deal without him? These are all questions that I would like answered. Thanks in advance. I dont know Who he is...But I do know the main cog in CBA is the owners want 2 games added and not cut the players in on the money generated...Thats whats effin the whole thing up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WRREBEL Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 I have been reading a little Lockout talk lately and one thing I keep on seeing is that a lot of fans are putting this on De Smith. I don't know much about the guy except that he was a lawyer and had no football background. Why do people think that he is the problem? Where does this stem from? Why does my wife hate when I refer to breasts as "shabadoos"? Can the players just override what Smith says and work a deal without him? These are all questions that I would like answered. Thanks in advance. He is a douche bag and his lips are bigger than mine.. He has no experiece negotiating. I hate when they get a guy like this. He is going to want to prove himself.. players and owners are so very greedy. If you ask me, us fans should boycott them if they dont get a deal done by march 4th.. Im not sure why your wife gets mad when you refer to boobs as shabadoo's. A wise person once told me marry a girl with small cleavage so when she gets old she wont have sagging breasts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 A wise person once told me marry a girl with small cleavage so when she gets old she wont have sagging breasts. so is that why you like boys? kiddin. (btw they will still sag, they'll just be small and saggy). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Buffalo Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 I blame both sides for this shit. I actually side with Cromartie with this whole issue. I want football but first and foremost there are 10,000 odd people who could end up losing jobs over a lock out who don't xxxxing make millions of dollars a year. For the most part both sides don't give a shit about these 10,000 people and all they want is theirs. Both sides are greedy, both need to compromise, end of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedyd900rr Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 Wealthy people fighting with rich people about who's going to make more money while they piss all over the backs of the poor people who made them rich and wealthy to begin with. Gotta love America. Just imagine what football would be like if all the players made a base salary of $20,000 a year with another $50,000 added for every game they win. When an entertainer makes more money in 60 minutes then someone who actually puts they're lives on the line such as a police officer, fire fighter, and military personnal make in there whole career something is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squintz Posted February 9, 2011 Report Share Posted February 9, 2011 I for one love the way Goodell is handling this whole thing and think De Smith is a tool. Just look at other sports where they let the players union run the league and you get 4-5 teams that run the league. We all know baseball ruined itself by giving in to the union. Sure, it's a strong union, but so was the auto-workers union. And what happened there? In basketball they have a salary cap but have a commish that is a pussy who only cares about the few elite players in his league. They can do no wrong. That's why 5 teams have won 87% of the NBA championships over the last 30 (yes, THIRTY) years (Lakers[9] Bulls[6] Spurs[4] Celtics[4] Pistons[3]. It's ridiculously unbalanced and uncontrolled. They let players collude and choose how to finagle the system to play with their home-boyz. I won't watch a minute of it again until something is fixed. I mean, 26 out of 30 from only FIVE teams? And only three other teams won the other four (Rockets [2] Heat [1] 76ers [1]). I like that Goodell has an iron fist. I like that he throws out suspensions that are tough. I like that he manages the league like a manager should, as a boss, not a buddy. He doesn't kiss the ass of the players. He understands his role - and he does it well. There is a great article on him in last weeks SI - good reading. IMO, De Smith and the NFLPA are kidding themselves if they think they have a chance. Should the NFL give more for healthcare to retired players? Definitely to players retired before 1990, but hell, nowadays the money these guys make should dictate their pension. If a guy like Peyton Manning needs a pension then he severely f'd up his financial situation. I think it's too complicated to look at black and white. And if the players are so concerned for ex-players and the old-school guys, why don't they step to the plate as a union and pitch in themselves for the players that laid the ground work for them to become multi-millionaires? I could ramble forever, but you get my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSU Kid Posted February 9, 2011 Report Share Posted February 9, 2011 Ok with a lockout looming what are everyone's thoughts on how important this is to get wrapped up quickly so our new staff can have mini-camps and OTA etc...if this lockout drags on through July we are really going to be behind the 8 ball even further that were we are now. This is a horrible time for all of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClevelandFanForLife Posted February 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 9, 2011 I think that a deal will get done sooner rather than later. There's just too much money to be made here. Both sides need to stop being such babies and get it done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 9, 2011 Report Share Posted February 9, 2011 Ok with a lockout looming what are everyone's thoughts on how important this is to get wrapped up quickly so our new staff can have mini-camps and OTA etc...if this lockout drags on through July we are really going to be behind the 8 ball even further that were we are now. This is a horrible time for all of this. The Browns shouldl not be any further behind than any of the other 31 teams because it will affect them equally.....at least in a vacuum that should be the case. However, any team that has undergone a changing of the guard like the Browns have would probably have issues with getting their system and program in place, as opposed to a team where there have been no major changes in the coaching staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Buffalo Posted February 9, 2011 Report Share Posted February 9, 2011 I think that a deal will get done sooner rather than later. There's just too much money to be made here. Both sides need to stop being such babies and get it done. If it doesn't get done before March 4th, it will be done before the draft starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClevelandFanForLife Posted February 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 9, 2011 If it doesn't get done before March 4th, it will be done before the draft starts. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob806 Posted February 9, 2011 Report Share Posted February 9, 2011 Billionaire owners vs. millionaire players (some of them anyhow). Doesn't that sound stupid? They should be ashamed if they can't get it done by March 4th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slowburn Posted February 9, 2011 Report Share Posted February 9, 2011 If argreement is not reached b4 March 3, it will be the NFL who initially suffers from the vast economic implications of a lockout. National companies will renege on business deals and walk away from the league. I don't think the players get paid during the off season so their financial hardships would not really kick in until the season was scheduled to start. Individual team draft strategies could, of course, be altered not knowing FA status of current NFL players. I think a settlement will be reached before the draft..........maintaining the validity of mock draft gurus throughout the land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted February 9, 2011 Report Share Posted February 9, 2011 The Browns shouldl not be any further behind than any of the other 31 teams because it will affect them equally.....at least in a vacuum that should be the case. However, any team that has undergone a changing of the guard like the Browns have would probably have issues with getting their system and program in place, as opposed to a team where there have been no major changes in the coaching staff. I think teams like Green Bay, New Orleans, Indy, New England, both New York teams, Pittspuke. Won't have much problem. Those teams are almost always the same regardless of what happens during the offseason. They might have a down year here or there, but for the most part they are pretty consistant. Like you said it's the teams that have new systems coming in are the ones that will have problems if the lockout affects training camps and OTA's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
htownbrown Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 Well when I think about Lerner, it makes me sick when this little spoiled bitch makes $1 off the Browns. I don't know much about the rest of the owners, but if 1/2 of them are like him I hope they get milked! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 Can season ticket holders, hold a strike over having to pay full price for preseason tickets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaspro Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 If the is a lockout, Will there be Scab players? If anyone knows for sure please tell me and explain it to me. Thanks in advance, Thomaspro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawgTracker Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 IF the browns are willing to risk some money it could work to their advantage. There might be teams that won't offer a player contract until a new union contract is approved. If we offer a guaranteed contract and take the risk of losing some money on it if a lockout happens we could end up ahead of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Buffalo Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 If the is a lockout, Will there be Scab players? If anyone knows for sure please tell me and explain it to me. Thanks in advance, Thomaspro They won't use scab players. To many teams to fill and the competition would be way off on most games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaspro Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 Too bad. I would love to see some scab players. Those guys would play their heart out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DestinFunk Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 Havent they been using scab players the last 10 years?...Field last years team Vs scabs..i bet they go 7-9 (or 7-11) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawgTracker Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 There will be plenty of sports to fill the time, college football, hockey and lingerie football. If they have a lockout I hope everyone switches to lingerie football (do you order a jersey or a sports bra? LOL) and the players go back to receiving $50,000 a year while the owners make a profit of $500,000 or less a year. Way too much time and money are spent worrying about pro football. Maybe they will break our reliance on it when we find something better to do on Sundays, Thursday nights, Sunday nights and monday nights. Do these spoiled millionaires really deserve that much time and attention from us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpeen Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Well when I think about Lerner, it makes me sick when this little spoiled bitch makes $1 off the Browns. I don't know much about the rest of the owners, but if 1/2 of them are like him I hope they get milked! I don't understand the comment??? Why shouldn't he make money?? Just because he has money??? The fact of the matter is he should make vast sums of money. When did profit become a dirty word in this country??? It's sickening the way some of you people think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob806 Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 I could ramble forever, but you get my point. Yes, I get your point. You sound like Governor Kasich, blame unions for all of America's ills. While unions have their drawbacks, they are necessary. Are they necessary in major league sports, I'm not so sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Buffalo Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Yes, I get your point. You sound like Governor Kasich, blame unions for all of America's ills. While unions have their drawbacks, they are necessary. Are they necessary in major league sports, I'm not so sure. Unions are around to make sure that hard working American's who make a shit to average salary are protected for some of the greedy companies they work for. I don't think millionaire sports players really need a "union" to protect them from getting super xxxxed. But at the same time you need a group there to protect them health wise (18 games a season) and to make sure that they are at least making what they deserve (making it so they are not making as much as teachers a shit like that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshirtfan Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 I for one love the way Goodell is handling this whole thing and think De Smith is a tool. Just look at other sports where they let the players union run the league and you get 4-5 teams that run the league. We all know baseball ruined itself by giving in to the union. Sure, it's a strong union, but so was the auto-workers union. And what happened there? In basketball they have a salary cap but have a commish that is a pussy who only cares about the few elite players in his league. They can do no wrong. That's why 5 teams have won 87% of the NBA championships over the last 30 (yes, THIRTY) years (Lakers[9] Bulls[6] Spurs[4] Celtics[4] Pistons[3]. It's ridiculously unbalanced and uncontrolled. They let players collude and choose how to finagle the system to play with their home-boyz. I won't watch a minute of it again until something is fixed. I mean, 26 out of 30 from only FIVE teams? And only three other teams won the other four (Rockets [2] Heat [1] 76ers [1]). I like that Goodell has an iron fist. I like that he throws out suspensions that are tough. I like that he manages the league like a manager should, as a boss, not a buddy. He doesn't kiss the ass of the players. He understands his role - and he does it well. There is a great article on him in last weeks SI - good reading. IMO, De Smith and the NFLPA are kidding themselves if they think they have a chance. Should the NFL give more for healthcare to retired players? Definitely to players retired before 1990, but hell, nowadays the money these guys make should dictate their pension. If a guy like Peyton Manning needs a pension then he severely f'd up his financial situation. I think it's too complicated to look at black and white. And if the players are so concerned for ex-players and the old-school guys, why don't they step to the plate as a union and pitch in themselves for the players that laid the ground work for them to become multi-millionaires? I could ramble forever, but you get my point. Your point about the NBA is wrong to me. The Spurs certainly didn't win 4 championships because they were favored by the elite, or possessed elite players that the league wanted to protect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
htownbrown Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 I don't understand the comment??? Why shouldn't he make money?? Just because he has money??? The fact of the matter is he should make vast sums of money. When did profit become a dirty word in this country??? It's sickening the way some of you people think. I'm not against capitalism......I just hate the fact that we have a douche for an owner. I can't stand owners who make millions on Sunday, but don't give a shit what product they deliver to the fans. Never said owners shouldn't make money, but can't stand when guys like him are making it. The waterboy is more devoted to this team he is. Give me a Rooney-type owner and I'll be happy to watch him get rich. Damn. If I'm choosing sides between a POS type owner and guys who actually arrive at the stadium for a football game, then yeah I would rather see players get their way. Even if the players milk them they will still makes millions upon millions. Besides the 'profit' arguement works both ways before you jump off the deep end. I just can't stand that its a pathetic owner like Lerner making it. Your acting like he actually invested anything in this team, even time. Football is a distraction to his soccer games where he actually acts like a real owner. So again if half of them are like him I hope they get milked because they make me sick. Id rather know MY money goes to someone who gives a xxxx. Since the profits come from people like ME. Do you own a lerner jersey? Do you go to the games to see him.....if he would even show up? Like I said they'll make plenty of money, but if you want everyone to support guys like Lerner who don't give a shit then your loco. He's the NFL equivalent to some asshole who owns a clothing store selling New Kids on the Block sweaters in August asking his employees to take a pay cut because he's not making enough to keep up his lifestyle of being a professional pussy. Not all the owners are like him, they actually care. If this was any other business Lerner would be bankrupt.......you know that too. Can't just expect to make tons of money with inferior products. The owners should be fighting amongst themselves about revenue sharing. I wish......then Lerner would be gone and we could get someone who gives a shit about winning football games. You people make sound like Colt is gonna make more than Lerner next year. Truthfully I could careless how this turns out as long as there is football next year, but I am not going to cry if billionaires like Lerner don't get their way. Boo xxxxing woo! The game is SUPPOSED to be about the players and the fans anyways........without either nobody makes shit. I sure as hell don't go to cheer for Lerner. Maybe you go to the games so Lerner can afford to buy golden soccer balls for Aston Villa to practice with, but I don't. xxxx him. Like Lerner really deserves more than he already gets.....get real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Unions are around to make sure that hard working American's who make a shit to average salary are protected for some of the greedy companies they work for. I don't think millionaire sports players really need a "union" to protect them from getting super xxxxed. But at the same time you need a group there to protect them health wise (18 games a season) and to make sure that they are at least making what they deserve (making it so they are not making as much as teachers a shit like that). Well, there's talk of decertifying the union, which would in theory may the NFL liable to anti-trust action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Can season ticket holders, hold a strike over having to pay full price for preseason tickets? Well you could in theory, but in reality- uh no. In fact love letters have already gone out to the season ticket holders saying "it's business as usual" and we want your cash by May. It might get interesting if there was a massive season ticket holder revolt withholding payment until the CBA gets settled, but the teams hold the high cards. My bet is it won't happen- at least with us folks who have long seniority. Way too risky. The PSL agreement clearly states if you don't pay up on time, the seats revert to the team- so if you've got inbetween the 30s primo seating that got handed down from your grandfather 40 years ago, you gonna chance Lerner and Co are going to be all understanding if "you" go on strike? Not likely. Another thing to factor in is the owners PRIMARY source of revenue isn't ticket sales- it's the TV revenue. So in theory, they could play the games in empty stadiums, and still make money- which is why I can't figure out why owners are bitching players are getting too big a piece of the pie. But getting back to the preseason prices- this is where the owners have it dead wrong. Season ticket holders aren't upset about the quality of the games- it's about being forced to pay full freight to watch the starters play one series in preseason #4. The not so rocket science solution is to cut the price of the preseason tickets in half, and amortize that over the regular season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.